The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1887-10-20

of women should be crcumscribed. They should
what use is Latin and Greek to womanf
Absolutely of account to ninety out of
hundred. woman. to fill her proper sphere in
life, had no time to learn Latin and Greek. She
might practice medicine and law it she would.
The third speaker introduced was Rev. b. W.
Maturin. of Philadelphia Women, he said.
have attained the highest positions in all
branches of knowledge Whatever woman
does she will fail. unless she is doing the thing
God made her a woman for. Women have the
power of intuition. which is great. A woman
can see a thing while man is trying TO reason
ii out, and tell him of it. Woman has
greater moral courage than man. and this should
be developed. They have an infinite power of
sef-sacri6ce. and when they stoop they conquer
When woman climbs to the top of the ladder,
not man will look at her. Their power is in
yielding, not in forcing their way.
Rev. DIR. Harwood. of New Haven, was next
introduced. He said an effeminate man is
always disliked, as is a masculine woman. He
advocated the study of Latin and Greek by
women, in order that they might understand
their language more perfectly. as well as
for many other reasons. It is not calculated TO
make a woman masculine or forget her proper
position.
Rev. John S. Brooks. of Springfield Mass
was next introduced and made short speech.
He believed in the perfect union of education
and religion. He believed a high order of edu-
cation was necessary for women, in order to do
their life work. woman can only have a full
and complete influence over her husband when
he realizes that she has as thorough educa-
AT the night session the most important dis.
cusson of the congress took place. the topic be-
ing the Proposal to Change the Name of the
Church" The attendance very large.
Bishop Dudley first introduced the Rev. G. S.
Bates. of Cleveland. O.. VINO took the place of
the RI s;. Re-, A. \, v, Randolph D. assist
having reported. He held that the Protestant
Episcopal was the best name. and that q change
was not desirable. great deal of misunder-
standing would have to be done away with be-
fore new name could be made to fill the proper
designation. new title would obscure the
identity of the church. The American Church"
urged by some, implied unity which did not
exist, and would imply larger membership
than the church possessed
the second writer was the Rt. Rev. Geo F.,
Seymour. d. D.. LII. D., Bishop of Springfield.
He advocated change from the name Prot
estant. He said if the church had the fear of
God at heart 1t must proceed very warily In the
matter of the change of the Was the
house of the Lord to be called by a name which
was universal nesativee Protestant was neg
alive. God was positive-the great l
Am. To characterize His church under
the negative protestant" was not in
line with the positive attributes of God. The
Master never protested. not Calvary
Did "Protist slant" harmonic with any sugees-
ton in the Bible2 Who ever heard of bride
called by and the BRIDE
groom by anotherl The name brought the
church into bad company and confused it
with agnostics and Anarchists. He esteemed it
dire misfortune that the church held the pres
eut name. "Prorestant' to the church to day
about the ''Galileean" applied to
Savior in His day. He had little objection to
the title Episcopal" though it misleading
ard opposed the traditions of the church.
He did not crave change so much as to have it
at the cost of schsm. 1t hac and could live
under the misfortune of a misnomer.
The first regular speaker introduced was the
Rev Phillips Brooks, D. D., of Boston. He said
that it was impossible to discuss a change with
out at the same time thinking of a new title.
The basis of the claim of those who held the ne
cessty Of changing was the preposterous idea of
adopting the Church Of America n title.
Snnh hoy INN Ind fhot fhA nkrVN
must take the stand that it the
only church in view of the apostolic succession
in the sight of the Lord Jesus Christ Multi
tudes in the church did not hold to the doctrine
of the apostolic succession to the view that it
was the only church by divine right The
church narrowing Itself by the con-
slant assertion of the dogma that it was alone
the church of Christ These the things
which were keeping our church out OF sy mpathy
with the people Let her be the church of
America, and then she could take the name. and
not until she ceased to copy and bring over for
eign customs. The American people believed
in the work of Christ a wonderful power for
good in this country The Protestant Episcopal
Church held aloof from the people.
The next speaker the Hon. L. Bradford
Prince. of Flushing, L. l. He said that it was a
practical question, how can we best serve the
interests of the Lord? Here the midst of
60000OOO of people the church was to be the
eayen of them IL was no childs play to Chris
tianize the whole American people. The practi-
cal laitv of the church found in the present
name of the church terrible obstacle to their at
tempt to Christianize the American people. 1t was
in every way obstacle to church growth
Briefly. in this land the church had two great
enemies-infdelity and Romansm. The latter
came upon this soil claiming allegiance a for
eign bishop. The present name was O badge of
sectaranism. We could not expect the other
denominations to become Protestant Episco-
palians." but they could invite them into the
american church"
The Rev VIM. Cyrus, rector of St. Michaers
Church. Baltimore next spoke. taking the place
of Bishop Thompson. of Mississippi He was
greatly astonshed at the contradiction of
the Bishop Bis o Of Springfield ring by sDsaks,
to most remarkable exegesis of the Scriptures
Jesus Christ mad protested Did he not pro-
test test AGAINST 81. evi ha,a;, Were we to be
epoch mnaJ in the church, What was the matter
with the name which we had all these years
been living with in blasphemya Romanism
found in this country multitude of sects. and,
of course, none OF them. Now, we
were to take another name. and Rome would. of
course, withdraw her claims. Did Protestant
mean Anarchy. entire disregard
OF Gods word2 It did not Protestant was
positive. There was nothing in Protestant
that implied Anarchy. unlimi ted right to
protest against any and every thing. That right
was limited by the thirty nine articles. Protest
ant not merely a negatives; it commemorated
a great victory in awful fight. The church was
becoming more Protestant every day. The
gentleman who preceded him was ilustra-
ton of the PrOteS tantiSm by the views he pro-
claimed
next spoke. He had been indifferent to the
change of name until he had heard the fervent
address of the bishop of Trinity, Boston. He
was what was called rtualist of the church.
but ne did not believe that single of the
RiruaIists would be for changing the
name to the Catholic" Church of Amer
lea. He would rather ten thousand times
have the Pope of Rome over him than
a Unitarian, or one VINO had no regard for the
church of Christ. If all the denominations were
to be divided into Protestants and Catholics he
would join the latter. The danger of the day
was not in being much but too little. It
was only at q late convention that he had heard
an Episcopal clergyman get up and repudate
the doctrine of the atonement. The Episcopal
church has run upon narrow lines. The rector
CT Trinity had, as much ss he. to refuse any
the communion outside of his own church He
felt that he was a much broader churchman than
those who had preceded him.
The Rev. F. r. Davenport. of Cairo, ILL.,, the
Sc I'd;